| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Dewar: I am grateful, Madam Speaker. I should be delighted if the hon. Gentleman wrote to me, and if he does not like my answer, it will give a much--
Madam Speaker: The hon. Gentleman may raise the matter if he seeks to catch my eye.
Mr. Dewar: Indeed he may, Madam Speaker, and I hope to be here--Oh well, no. [Laughter.] That might be going too far.
A second and crucial difference from 1978--I shall telescope this--is that we have moved to define the reserved rather than the devolved powers, to ensure maximum clarity and stability. Anyone looking at the 1978 Act would see a somewhat grudging document, which would have required frequent updating. There would have been a greater danger--I put it no higher than that--of arguments over vires. We wished to minimise the difficulties of interpretation and to allow for maximum flexibility in future. We have done so.
My third point is that the Secretary of State for Scotland will not have what is sometimes called the governor- general role, which was at the heart of the 1978 Act and was put upon the shoulders of the Secretary of State. The Scottish Parliament and Scottish Executive will have their own direct relationships with the Crown, rather than using the Secretary of State as an intermediary. Legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament will not need to go to the Secretary of State for consideration and approval before it is passed to the Queen for Royal Assent. It is important that we do not have such overriding decisions. It would have sullied the atmosphere and made for great difficulties. I am glad about that particular extension.
Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye and Inverness, West):
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way on this extremely important point, and I very much agree with his analysis. In the contrast that he is drawing between the current proposals and those of the late 1970s, he has been sensible enough to recognise the inevitable reduction in the number of Scottish Members of Parliament going to Westminster. When one considers this bold and imaginative White Paper in that respect, it is de facto the case that the office of Secretary of State effectively becomes redundant. If this reaches a successful conclusion, does he anticipate being the last holder of the office of Secretary of State, not just in its present form, but as a meaningful office of state at Cabinet level?
Mr. Dewar:
That office certainly will change in character quite radically, because of the 12,000 civil servants and the range of legislative responsibilities passed to the Scottish Parliament. There will, in my view, still be a need for liaison. In the important areas of foreign affairs, defence, economic affairs in particular and fiscal affairs, there will still be a need for a Scottish voice in the Administration of the day, in United Kingdom terms. I do not share the hon. Gentleman's absolutist view on that matter, although I accept that it is something in which his party has believed for a very long time.
What is certain is that the Secretary of State will not have what I referred to as a governor-general role. To be fair, if one looks back to 1978, the White Paper made the point that it was expected that the Secretary of State could object to and block a Scottish Parliament Bill on the basis that he did not agree with it as a matter of policy. There was then a considerable outcry, and that was diluted in section 38 to the circumstances in which it would or might affect a reserved matter and was not in the public interest. But the override was there in a way that would have made for great difficulties in interpretation. The clarity of the new settlement is important.
I very much doubt whether my old friend who was Secretary of State at that time saw himself in a governor-general role, but certainly he was driven out of it by popular outcry. Some hon. Members may remember
that, on one occasion, the late George Brown, on being introduced to someone who had just become a governor- general, established conversationally that he had a hat with plumes and, as he left, said in a friendly way that he hoped that his feathers would fall out. I think that that is what happened to the governor-general role way back then, and we have finally buried the matter.
Dr. Liam Fox (Woodspring)
rose--
Mr. Dewar:
Oh, a Front-Bench spokesman.
Dr. Fox:
The Secretary of State has been quite good at following the point through in the debate, but how does he envisage the role of the Secretary of State developing if there is a Scottish Parliament of one colour in Edinburgh and a United Kingdom Parliament of a different political colour in London?
Mr. Dewar:
The Secretary of State might be a little busier and his job might be a little more difficult, but that perhaps underlines the need for it. I met a Member of Parliament the other day--I make no complaint because he had not been following the argument--who thought that the Secretary of State would be in the Scottish Parliament, reflecting its political colour. The Secretary of State is a member of the United Kingdom Government and, clearly, his role will be to consider Scotland and Scotland's needs according to the beliefs and opinions of that Government, reflecting them in the counsels of that Government. We could argue about the detail, but the position is perfectly clear.
I want to push on to one or two other quick points, because I might outstay my welcome. The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive--I mention this particularly because I recognise that it is a matter of great controversy; rather more controversy than I expected--will obviously have a role and will be closely involved in European decision making and will have a presence in Brussels. The White Paper uses the words:
To end all doubts, I make it clear that I accept that of course the Scottish Executive representative will want to try to influence and take part in that matter. But at the end of the day, the United Kingdom is the member state and a common United Kingdom position will have to be evolved, and everyone will have a duty to try to advance that position in negotiations with other member states.
Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York):
That raises an interesting point of constitutional law. The United Kingdom is responsible for negotiating its obligations as a member state, but the Scottish Parliament would have to implement them, which might lead to difficulties. Has the Secretary of State considered any potential constitutional difficulties in that relationship?
Mr. Dewar:
Sotto voce he says, "Everyone else has," but that may be optimistic. However, I have and my
Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan):
The Secretary of State is undoubtedly correct to say that member states have certain rights and entitlements in the European structure of decision making, which are not given to non-member states or, indeed, regions of member states. However, the White Paper envisages Scottish Parliament representatives leading the UK delegation on specific matters. What does he expect those matters to be? How often does he think that a Scottish Parliament representative will lead the UK delegation?
Mr. Dewar:
I would not speculate about that, although there are precedents where Scottish Office Ministers have regulated parts of discussions and, occasionally, spoken in debates as members of the UK delegation. It is difficult to predict or to play the numbers game. I know that the hon. Gentleman is interested in the numbers game. He predicted confidently the number of seats that his party would win at the election. He was wrong. I make no complaint about that, but it is a dangerous game. If he looks at the White Paper, he will see that a strong and robust role is proposed for Scottish Executive representatives as part of the UK delegation.
"The closest possible working relationships and involvement",
and involvement of the Scottish Executive
"as directly and fully as possible in the Government's decision making on European Union matters"
is what is on offer.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |